3 ms·

Probably not much. A bit more intuition about non-commutative transforms, perhaps. But you don't gain anything much from learning to solve them either. It's a

Probably not much. A bit more intuition about non-commutative transforms, perhaps. But you don't gain anything much from learning to solve them either. It's a fun party trick once or twice, but you'll likely feel uncomfortable not acknowledging that you read the answer, at which point it's comparatively unimpressive.

UweSchmidt 6y ago
Is there any game or challenge that actually makes you smarter or better or helps you out in any practical way?
- 082349872349872 6y ago
  Depends upon what one considers practical? I had some nice (here: both informative and entertaining) conversations with someone I'd consider a genius, not via the more evidently practical skill of juggling, but because we'd made each others' acquaintance due to a mutual interest in Rubik's Cube.
  - Someone 6y ago
    If you haven’t seen it, you may be interested in https://youtube.com/watch?v=q6AsllXpKBU https://youtube.com/watch?v=q6AsllXpKBU, which combines solving Rubik’s cube with juggling (1 minute, 41 seconds per cube)
- monsieurbanana 6y ago
  Of course. Games like go can help reduce the effects of Alzheimer[1]. I'm sure there are studies for chess too. Sports are games with obvious health, mental and social benefits. On a more intuitive level (aka I don't know if it's been researched), I would be surprised if most board games don't improve, at least a bit, the analytical thinking useful for many engineering fields (or even day to day life). Challenges is a term too broad, you can imagine countless ones that have practical benefits. Learning-to-play-an-instrument-in-a-month challenge for example. 100 push-ups a day for a month. Read one book a month. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548213/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548213/
- rimliu 6y ago
  Speedcubing. It is very ignorant to claim that all you need is to know a bunch of algorithms. It is on par to claim that to win a basketball match you need to throw a ball into the basket. You need to think how to optimally solve the cross (or maybe to do extended cross), you need to be quick to spot the pieces for F2L and to choose optimal way to place them, you can choose different ways to solve the last layer to maybe gat an OLL or a PLL skip.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  Millions of years of evolution and the presence of play in mammals suggests yes
082349872349872 6y ago
> A bit more intuition about non-commutative transforms Most (almost all?) state machines one encounters in software are non-commutative. Cosets and conjugation are cromulent CS concepts. Edit: Grand Corps non Commutatif https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZXHoWwBcDc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZXHoWwBcDc
- wyattpeak 6y ago
  Oh, for sure, I don't mean to suggest that non-commutativity isn't an important concept. But just as I think throwing a ball around is of limited value beyond a bit of intuition in studying aerodynamics, I don't think playing with a Rubik's cube is going to fundamentally advance your understanding of transforms.
bryanrasmussen 6y ago
If you can explain the various algorithms and how they work it may still seem impressive.
- Someone 6y ago
  In my opinion, you don’t understand the Rubik’s cube if you don’t know how to solve larger ones. I’ve never held a 5×5×5 or larger in my hand, but I know I can solve it or any larger one easily. Variants such as dodecagons can be a little trickier, as knowledge doesn’t transfer as easily, but if you understand the cube, you still should be able to solve them reasonably quickly.
ansible 6y ago
> But you don't gain anything much from learning to solve them either. It is very useful to be able to solve the cube yourself. This allows you to start from a solved state easily, and then experiment with different patterns, move sequences, etc. I was not one of those people who could completely track the state of the cube in my mind. But it was easy for me to see what I've done if I started from the solved state.
srtjstjsj 6y ago
Telling people what kinds of intellectual effort are worthy of your respect is both obnoxious and interesting. Please stop.

UweSchmidt 6y ago

Is there any game or challenge that actually makes you smarter or better or helps you out in any practical way?

082349872349872 6y ago
Depends upon what one considers practical? I had some nice (here: both informative and entertaining) conversations with someone I'd consider a genius, not via the more evidently practical skill of juggling, but because we'd made each others' acquaintance due to a mutual interest in Rubik's Cube.
- Someone 6y ago
  If you haven’t seen it, you may be interested in https://youtube.com/watch?v=q6AsllXpKBU https://youtube.com/watch?v=q6AsllXpKBU, which combines solving Rubik’s cube with juggling (1 minute, 41 seconds per cube)
monsieurbanana 6y ago
Of course. Games like go can help reduce the effects of Alzheimer[1]. I'm sure there are studies for chess too. Sports are games with obvious health, mental and social benefits. On a more intuitive level (aka I don't know if it's been researched), I would be surprised if most board games don't improve, at least a bit, the analytical thinking useful for many engineering fields (or even day to day life). Challenges is a term too broad, you can imagine countless ones that have practical benefits. Learning-to-play-an-instrument-in-a-month challenge for example. 100 push-ups a day for a month. Read one book a month. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548213/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548213/
rimliu 6y ago
Speedcubing. It is very ignorant to claim that all you need is to know a bunch of algorithms. It is on par to claim that to win a basketball match you need to throw a ball into the basket. You need to think how to optimally solve the cross (or maybe to do extended cross), you need to be quick to spot the pieces for F2L and to choose optimal way to place them, you can choose different ways to solve the last layer to maybe gat an OLL or a PLL skip.
srtjstjsj 6y ago
Millions of years of evolution and the presence of play in mammals suggests yes

082349872349872 6y ago

> A bit more intuition about non-commutative transforms Most (almost all?) state machines one encounters in software are non-commutative. Cosets and conjugation are cromulent CS concepts. Edit: Grand Corps non Commutatif https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZXHoWwBcDc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZXHoWwBcDc

wyattpeak 6y ago
Oh, for sure, I don't mean to suggest that non-commutativity isn't an important concept. But just as I think throwing a ball around is of limited value beyond a bit of intuition in studying aerodynamics, I don't think playing with a Rubik's cube is going to fundamentally advance your understanding of transforms.

bryanrasmussen 6y ago

If you can explain the various algorithms and how they work it may still seem impressive.

Someone 6y ago
In my opinion, you don’t understand the Rubik’s cube if you don’t know how to solve larger ones. I’ve never held a 5×5×5 or larger in my hand, but I know I can solve it or any larger one easily. Variants such as dodecagons can be a little trickier, as knowledge doesn’t transfer as easily, but if you understand the cube, you still should be able to solve them reasonably quickly.

ansible 6y ago

> But you don't gain anything much from learning to solve them either. It is very useful to be able to solve the cube yourself. This allows you to start from a solved state easily, and then experiment with different patterns, move sequences, etc. I was not one of those people who could completely track the state of the cube in my mind. But it was easy for me to see what I've done if I started from the solved state.

srtjstjsj 6y ago

Telling people what kinds of intellectual effort are worthy of your respect is both obnoxious and interesting. Please stop.